feat: Take the whole rustc version into hash calculation

[Xuanwo]

Signed-off-by: Xuanwo github@xuanwo.io

Fix #1552

This is a use case that may break user's build after rust version bumped.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Base: 30.91% // Head: 30.91% // Decreases project coverage by -0.00% ⚠️

Coverage data is based on head (c8f49a5) compared to base (1a82863).
Patch coverage: 10.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

❗ Current head c8f49a5 differs from pull request most recent head 5e0e22e. Consider uploading reports for the commit 5e0e22e to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1553      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   30.91%   30.91%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          48       48              
  Lines       16589    16598       +9     
  Branches     7896     7906      +10     
==========================================
+ Hits         5129     5131       +2     
+ Misses       6107     6106       -1     
- Partials     5353     5361       +8     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/compiler/compiler.rs	36.24% <0.00%> (-0.22%)	⬇️
src/compiler/rust.rs	33.55% <11.11%> (-0.67%)	⬇️
src/jobserver.rs	47.91% <0.00%> (-2.09%)	⬇️
src/cache/cache.rs	40.31% <0.00%> (-0.39%)	⬇️
src/config.rs	36.59% <0.00%> (-0.19%)	⬇️
src/compiler/msvc.rs	43.35% <0.00%> (-0.14%)	⬇️
src/lib.rs	10.67% <0.00%> (ø)
src/util.rs	35.50% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 8 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[drahnr]

The rustc binary is hashed already, which by definition must change if the output of rustc -vV would change.

Could you elaborate on the precise case that would require the version to be hashed in addition?

[Xuanwo]

The rustc binary is hashed already, which by definition must change if the output of rustc -vV would change.

I must miss this part. Can you point out the detailed place which rustc been hashed? Thanks.

[drahnr]

I was writing that from memory, since there were issues in the past when switching from nightly to stable or vice versa, I have yet to double check the code

[Xuanwo]

I was writing that from memory, since there were issues in the past when switching from nightly to stable or vice versa, I have yet to double check the code

My current understanding is we just hashed the path to rustc instead rustc itself, thus we need the verbose version get hashed.

[sylvestre]

it is the path and it is coming from rustup, it should be something like
~/.rustup/toolchains/1.58-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/rustc ?

[Xuanwo]

it is the path and it is coming from rustup, it should be something like ~/.rustup/toolchains/1.58-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/rustc ?

I'm afraid that we just found cargo:

[2023-01-11T08:34:03Z DEBUG sccache::compiler::compiler] Found rustc at path: "/home/xuanwo/.cargo/bin/rustc"

This can be reproduced by change:

- debug!("Found rustc");
+ debug!("Found rustc at path: {rustc_executable:?}");

[glandium]

it is the path and it is coming from rustup, it should be something like ~/.rustup/toolchains/1.58-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/rustc ?

I don't think that's guaranteed. It could well be ~/.cargo/bin/rustc. Also, in most cases it would be ~/.rustup/toolchains/stable-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/rustc.

[glandium]

And yeah, when the path is ~/.cargo/bin/rustc, if you were hashing the binary, you'd end up hashing rustup's binary, which never changes. It's possible to unwrap and find the real binary, though...

[sylvestre]

it is the path and it is coming from rustup, it should be something like ~/.rustup/toolchains/1.58-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/rustc ?

I don't think that's guaranteed. It could well be ~/.cargo/bin/rustc. Also, in most cases it would be ~/.rustup/toolchains/stable-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/rustc.

or /usr/bin/rustc ;)

[glandium]

There is actually code to unwrap the rustup proxy already:

sccache/src/compiler/compiler.rs

Line 962 in 1a82863

let proxy = RustupProxy::find_proxy_executable::<T>(

[drahnr]

The rustc binary is hashed already, which by definition must change if the output of rustc -vV would change.

Could you elaborate on the precise case that would require the version to be hashed in addition?

This was wrong, I got confused and thought the sysroot would include rustc, but it apparently does not. Sorry for the red hering.